Opinion
2:21-00488-RSM
07-23-2024
TIMAERO IRELAND LIMITED, Plaintiff, v. THE BOEING COMPANY, Defendant.
Ulrike B. Connelly Kathleen M. O'Sullivan, WSBA No. 27850 Harry H. Schneider, Jr., WSBA No. 9404 Eric B. Wolff, WSBA No. 43047 Ulrike B. Connelly, WSBA No. 42478 Sarah L. Schirack, WSBA No. 59669 Marten N. King, WSBA No. 57106 Perkins Coie LLP Attorneys for Defendant The Boeing Company
Ulrike B. Connelly Kathleen M. O'Sullivan, WSBA No. 27850 Harry H. Schneider, Jr., WSBA No. 9404 Eric B. Wolff, WSBA No. 43047 Ulrike B. Connelly, WSBA No. 42478 Sarah L. Schirack, WSBA No. 59669 Marten N. King, WSBA No. 57106 Perkins Coie LLP Attorneys for Defendant The Boeing Company
UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE PLAINTIFF'S REDACTED THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT AND ORDER
RICARDO S. MARTINEZ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Defendant The Boeing Company (“Boeing”) respectfully moves the Court to grant Plaintiff Timaero Ireland Limited (“Timaero”) leave to file a redacted version of its Third Amended Complaint and maintain the unredacted copy under seal. The proposed redactions seal only about 12 lines out of a 116-page complaint and are necessary to protect Boeing's confidential business information. The proposed redacted Third Amended Complaint for filing is attached as Exhibit A. Plaintiff does not oppose the redactions in Exhibit A.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
This motion follows on the parties' prior request to seal the recently filed Third Amended Complaint, which the Court granted on July 15, 2024. See ECF No. 151. Ulrike Connelly, on behalf of Boeing, and Alan Harrison, on behalf of Timaero, conferred again via email on June 1819, 2024. Counsel for Timaero represented that Timaero does not oppose Boeing's proposed redactions of minimal portions of the Third Amended Complaint, which is the least restrictive means of protecting Boeing's contractual information.
LEGAL STANDARD AND ARGUMENT
This unopposed motion adopts and incorporates by reference the parties' Stipulated Motion for Leave to File Third Amended Complaint Under Seal at ECF No. 147. For the reasons set out in the Stipulated Motion, the two particular contract terms of the Aircraft General Terms Agreements and Letter Agreements summarized in Timaero's Third Amended Complaint-specifically at paragraphs 369 and 371-73-should be redacted in the public filing. The specific sections to be redacted either disclose (1) termination provisions or (2) amounts owed under the contract, both of which are material terms of confidential contracts negotiated between Boeing and one of its customers. Such information is maintained as highly confidential in the normal course of Boeing's business and the disclosure of such information would damage Boeing's ability to negotiate similar terms with other customers. See ECF No. 147.
Redacting portions of four out of the Third Amended Complaint's 375 total paragraphs (less than 1% of the Third Amended Complaint) is the least restrictive method available to ensure protection of Boeing's confidential and sensitive information. See LCR 5(g)(3)(B)(iii) (requiring the least restrictive method to ensure protection of material to be sealed). Because there are no less restrictive alternatives available, the parties agree that these limited redactions are appropriate.
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, Boeing respectfully requests that this Court grant Timaero leave to file a redacted Third Amended Complaint, attached as Exhibit A, leaving sealed only small portions of four paragraphs that disclose the contents of Boeing's proprietary business contracts.
ORDER
Based upon the foregoing Unopposed Motion, the Court hereby:
ORDERS, ADJUDGES AND DECREES that the redacted copy of Plaintiff Timaero's Third Amended Complaint may be filed on the docket. The Court orders the original Third Amended Complaint be maintained under seal.
IT IS SO ORDERED.